Can anybody explain, when it says "But the electron is not alone. It has a sister." (3:54) how this entanglement was formed? Which physical action led to the "sibling relationship"? Perhaps the answer is already @ 4:39 ("At this point the two electrons get entangled"). How is it that the electrons are entangled at this very moment? Aren't these emitted photons mere representations of the electrons, which were entangled somewhere in past history? Is this video using confusing term/definitions? I'm lost :)
I too didn't get the part of how it's actually getting entangled. How are the two artifical diamonds related to one another? And even if the other diamond is a perfect copy of the first one, why are they taking the collective electron spin induced by a missing carbon atom taking into consideration? As far as I know, quantum entanglement means the two objects will move the same way as one object does. And the distance can be infinite.
This video isn't really explaining exactly what's happening, it's just giving a basic explanation, it's not 100% accurate to what the experiment is, but the bare basics is correct.
+stevenmcl1 Thanks :-). I read the paper and I also read more on the entanglement swapping, and this to me is a really sore point :-). I see two possibilities: a) the entanglement swapping at C *does* something to A and B. If that is the case, and actually *causes* some change somehow (I am not even speculating how :-), then it should in principle be possible to check that something has changed later on. For instance, if we don't do C, then we get certain statistics for the spins of A and B. If we do C, then the stats for A and B are different - I mean beyond the experiments. If any of the spins was actually *changed* because of C, that could possibly later be verified, since the spins do not just vanish (maybe we measure the spin again at an angle of 0, which is obvious etc) (I doubt anyone is seriously claiming that hat is done at C is actually *causing* a *physical* entanglement at A and B?). b) the entanglement swapping is just used as a *filter*, that picks out the right photons to be measured (using the interference). In that case, there is no actuall physical change of any kind, no "real" physical entanglement (other than on paper ;-). Then to me it begs the question: if A and B had nothing in common before and C does not change anything, then is calling A and B "entangled" maybe a bit exaggerated ;-)?
Chantal Roth I'm not entirely sure about the process in itself as I'm not versed that greatly in Quantum Mechanics, but from what I'm reading if I'm looking at the diagrams and material correctly, that they're recording the outcomes in 3 separate locations. Two being with the diamonds themselves, and the final location being where the sensors are at C. So it may be possible that they're reading from A and B whether or not their spin is "1 or 0" and then recording the end result at C as both being "1 or 0" to correlate the detected information? I could possibly be reading this wrong, but I suppose that would make sense considering they were timestamping the results with a randomly generated number along with it. So I suppose in this instance, again if I'm reading this correctly, it's got in total 4 answers it correlates. To best explain what I'm thinking, it would be this: (A: Diamond 1 Emitter. B: Diamond 2 Emitter. Ca: Diamond 1 Receiver. Cb: Diamond 2 Receiver.) So therefor in example A: 1, B: 0, Ca: 1, Cb: 0 correlated would mean a successful recording with the timestamping? I don't see anywhere really how they matched up the data so that could be the case if I didn't overlook anything, but I'm just speculating at this point.
Precise oscillations of quantum entangled particles was also theorized, but also disproven, as even delaying the detection of one of the entangled particles did not change the sister particle from displaying the proper spin. There is nothing left, there is no other mechanism left which could communicate the appropriate information. The only reasonable conclusion is, three dimensional distance is an illusion, and particles themselves exist on a higher plane of existence, at least partially, which was already predicted in other theories. This would allow them to exist detached from time, so the information could be communicated to it as it was able to communicate with it at one point in time. It's 'hidden variable' could simply be that it simply does not need to do things in chronological order. If you really think about it however, anything which moves at the speed of light, cannot have a concept of time in the first place. Time would stop at that speed. So this time restricted order of operations does seem to be foreign idea to something which exists outside of it in the first place.
and what were the results of the 20%? were the 20% non measurable as in the tests failed? or both particles showed upwards or down wards spin that's comparable to one another when measured? or the measurement was simultaneous up and down spin? Curious what were the results on the 20%, thanks.
If the distance cannot be travelled by these communicating electrons within the boundaries of the speed of light, but the entanglement does take place in 80% of the experiments done, does this mean that these electrons communicate with each other with a speed that surpasses the speed of light?
Two electrons at two seemingly different places are in singlet state. If you make measurement of polarization or spin on one particle, second particle will instantly change its state to give you exactly opposite result (law of conservation of momentum), no matter how distant those particles are. By measurement is meant any form of physical interaction from which can be state of the particle derived. But you still can't use this phenomenon to send any form of information by speed higher than the speed of light. It's hypothesized the way spacetime is created and basic geometric spacetime structure is in very intimate correlation with this action at a distance. And that it's responsible for existence of spacetime.
You're welcome. And entanglement doesn't take place in 80% of experiments. 80% means correlation between measurements of entangled states. All electrons measured are entangled in this experiment. Otherwise, experiment would be useless. Mathematically, probability derived by Bell's inequalities says that correlation should be equal or less than 75%. If electrons have some hidden variables that determine result of experiments. But experiment proved it's 80% which is in accordance with theory and it proved that there are not hidden variables and particles are truly in quantum entangled state.
+Matúš Frisík Mat. I disagree with your hypothesis. I think it possible to transmit and receive information faster then light speed. As particals are entangled, a matrix of said could be amassed at different site anywhere within the universe. By encoding one group with the other, discernible information could be sent by changing one or the other matrix structures. The other would respond instantaneously. Not unlike Morse Code at its' simplest. Efforts are being made to build a quantum computer. Build two, separate them and they would be able to communicate over any distance instantly without any physical interface whatever.
Once particles become entangled, they act as if they are part of the same fundamental unit of spacetime (string) and necessarily have instant communication, since we cannot measure in smaller units.
So the electron spin between the diamonds are somehow "referencing" each other without any previous setup work to "connect" them? But they're not entangled until almost the very end of the process?
It seems to me that the act or process of "entangling" the two distant electron spins anti-correlates their spins. And the entanglement process itself occurs at light speed or less so. How is that different from two physical particles having correlated momentums if they were created at the same time such as particle and antiparticle creation? If you measure one you know the momentum of the other even though it's far away because the momentums are correlated.
mioumitsou forces or any interaction in the universe is via force carrying particles which has a zero rest mass and travel at the speed of light.. also light is the force carrying particle of electromagnetism hence no information can travel faster than the speed of light
Information is any data which can be used to make any form of predictions or can be used for any form of analysis of a system as of currently we know any information can be sent only by use of some form of energy so no information can travel faster than light
00:30f _According to Quantum Mechanics, a particel can be in two states at the same time._ Not just two but a whole continuum of them. Actually, it's not multiple _states_ but one state which can be a superposition of multiple _eigenstates_ with respect to a certain physical quantity or observable while it might be just one eigenstate with respect to another one. If an Electron in an atom is in an eigenstate with respect to its energy (meaning that you'll always get the same value of it when you measure it), it's clearly not in an eigenstate with respect to position, obviously.
Are the directions set/checked during the transfer? Could the direction not be set during the entanglement, rather than before it? Like a magnet, they just oppose each other?I'm really confused :)
-The electrons emit photons. -The photons are entangled with the spin of electrons. -The photons collide. -At this point of time, the 'electrons' get entangled ! how ?? Pls reply... m confused !!
I'll gloss over some of the inconsistencies here. Especially with particles being in the same state at the same time, are you trying to equate superposition with that statement, because its definitively not that.
can someone explain to me how this debunks materialism? All the results are made of "observable matter". If anything doesn't it pose more of a threat to determinism??
Well i suppose if there is a causal link here that is operating faster than the speed of light than how can space be real? If any two things in the physical universe are to affect one another than the fastest that interaction should be able to take place is the speed of light. in quantum mechanics this is not the case and locality seems to be violated, that is why Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance". Personally my years of truth seeking have brought me to the reality of Idealism - reality is fundamentally mental, consciousness or being is what is real. Hence the soul exists
Because those particles that they travel just before they are measured they are waves of possibilities AKA have not yet become anything physical/solid, but once they are measured/bombarded with light/observed call it whatever you want to call it, they become solid/physical.... That's why Einstein didn't like the spooky action at distance, he said even if he don't look at the moon he can not accept to believe that the moon is not there just because he is not looking at it.... Welcome to Quantum Physics, the science that puts all religions to shame when it comes to weirdness.
4:38 The electrons were never measured, regardless of entanglement. You measured the photons. You animation showed that the entanglement was between the photons, at this apparatus (a mirror?), and was measured in extreme close proximity. The original electrons being 1.3km away from each other appeared irrelevant.
All good but the entanglement means your two qubits will always yield the "same outcome" ... so if you observe a Green Apple on one of your entangled sides, you will observe a Green Apple on the other side as well ... not the opposite state. The entanglement ensures that when your qubits collapse due to your observation, quite randomly, they both show the exact same outcome!
Basically it like, conditional probability. Once Event E i.e first apple coming up Green happens it affects the probability of another one turning Red or Green.. so it is not that both end up being Green or Red Just probabilities change.. it becomes more likely ..
Seems as a sound experiment one which a serious amount of time have been taken with, I wouldn't want to take it yet as a sort of counter proof to a theoretical theory. Windmills don't hover and fly by changing the information of their structure or is it?. I think anyone would like to know how Einsteins mind puzzled its way to conjure a theory, It may be to early but this could be profound in a latter direction as it always happen in scientific community.
Which particles are entangled? Does this entanglement say anything about the size of the universe? If entangled maybe they are not many. They are one…? You get it!
Had to watch the video four times to understand more or less the point. I am not a physics guy but generally interested. Am I right that Einstein is definitively falsified ? If QT is right why isn't 100% going through? Put differently : this is not a verification of Quantum Theory? It is quite possible that I missed something.
+bennie gek Could be a certain margin of error with the experiment itself, are all sets of photons properly entangling when they are supposed to for example.
+bennie gek because relativity and quantum mechanics are not two theories that contradict each other. Einstein just didn't like the idea of something that happens at random.
+bennie gek This actually proves the things that Einstein showed in regards to quantum mechanics. However Einstein didn't like the implications of his own work and so he said there must be something else going on that we don't know about - the "hidden variables". He probably felt this was necessary because the speed of light is really a stand in for the speed of causality, and this "spooky action at a distance" breaks that limit. This experiment helps prove that the hidden variables don't exist and that Einstein's original predictions about "action at a distance" are correct.
no men, this actually proves Einstein was wrong.... Einstein thought that there is a some sort of a hidden force that predict what will be the variable ahead of time. Either way, whether Einstein proven wrong or wright does not take away the weirdness of how 2 particles communicate instantaneously at distances that our minds can not even grasp, and yet whatever happens on the macro level does not influence us not 1 bit in our every day life.
I was going to past a link to a relevant article, but the pasting function is disabled! (on FF) WTF, UA-cam?!? (Sorry, I'm not going to manually type the long URL! UA-cam can go f- itself!!)
Wow, copy-and-paste works fine in the replies, but not in the comments... Here is the link: www.cnet.com/news/physicists-prove-einsteins-spooky-quantum-entanglement/
Unfortunately this explanation itself is not "loophole free"; as can be seen from the comments below, it is very poorly explained. This explanation reminds me of lectures by an old physics professor I had at university who was so intelligent that he left out large chunks of very important information in his proofs, just writing "obviously this follows.." - he made the mistake of assuming all his students were as intelligent as him and would be offended by being "spoon-fed".
I/ve actually simulated this, experiment, in SW, and figured out how to reproduce their results. If U really want to know and ask me, nicely, I may be persuaded to tell U, how. "They don't. They won't". I know, Marv.
I don't think you can entangle two separate electrons because you shined a laser at them. It would be like stating: because you shined a flash light at a splitting mirror which bounced the beams at two identical basket balls a mile apart they are now entangled. I think for something truly to become entangled you'd have to split an object (like an electron). At that moment the two halves are now entangled. if you move them apart and observe from the middle. as you turn to look at each half you will see they are rotating in opposite directions. If you look at them from the left or right you will see they rotate in the same direction. If you move them anywhere in the universe in any orientation, they will mimic each other's rotation (that is, if you have the ability to change the rotation of one of the halves in the first place). Sorry, I simply can't accept this experiment proves or disproves anything.
Can anybody explain, when it says "But the electron is not alone. It has a sister." (3:54) how this entanglement was formed? Which physical action led to the "sibling relationship"? Perhaps the answer is already @ 4:39 ("At this point the two electrons get entangled"). How is it that the electrons are entangled at this very moment? Aren't these emitted photons mere representations of the electrons, which were entangled somewhere in past history? Is this video using confusing term/definitions?
I'm lost :)
I too didn't get the part of how it's actually getting entangled. How are the two artifical diamonds related to one another? And even if the other diamond is a perfect copy of the first one, why are they taking the collective electron spin induced by a missing carbon atom taking into consideration? As far as I know, quantum entanglement means the two objects will move the same way as one object does. And the distance can be infinite.
I thought the same thing. It does not seem very convincing to me if the entanglement happens just before the measurement ;-)
This video isn't really explaining exactly what's happening, it's just giving a basic explanation, it's not 100% accurate to what the experiment is, but the bare basics is correct.
+stevenmcl1
Thanks :-). I read the paper and I also read more on the entanglement swapping, and this to me is a really sore point :-).
I see two possibilities:
a) the entanglement swapping at C *does* something to A and B. If that is the case, and actually *causes* some change somehow (I am not even speculating how :-),
then it should in principle be possible to check that something has changed later on.
For instance, if we don't do C, then we get certain statistics for the spins of A and B.
If we do C, then the stats for A and B are different - I mean beyond the experiments. If any of the spins was actually *changed* because of C, that could possibly later be verified, since the spins do not just vanish (maybe we measure the spin again at an angle of 0, which is obvious etc)
(I doubt anyone is seriously claiming that hat is done at C is actually *causing* a *physical* entanglement at A and B?).
b) the entanglement swapping is just used as a *filter*, that picks out the right photons to be measured (using the interference).
In that case, there is no actuall physical change of any kind, no "real" physical entanglement (other than on paper ;-).
Then to me it begs the question: if A and B had nothing in common before and C does not change anything, then is calling A and B "entangled" maybe a bit exaggerated ;-)?
Chantal Roth I'm not entirely sure about the process in itself as I'm not versed that greatly in Quantum Mechanics, but from what I'm reading if I'm looking at the diagrams and material correctly, that they're recording the outcomes in 3 separate locations. Two being with the diamonds themselves, and the final location being where the sensors are at C. So it may be possible that they're reading from A and B whether or not their spin is "1 or 0" and then recording the end result at C as both being "1 or 0" to correlate the detected information?
I could possibly be reading this wrong, but I suppose that would make sense considering they were timestamping the results with a randomly generated number along with it. So I suppose in this instance, again if I'm reading this correctly, it's got in total 4 answers it correlates. To best explain what I'm thinking, it would be this:
(A: Diamond 1 Emitter. B: Diamond 2 Emitter. Ca: Diamond 1 Receiver. Cb: Diamond 2 Receiver.)
So therefor in example A: 1, B: 0, Ca: 1, Cb: 0 correlated would mean a successful recording with the timestamping? I don't see anywhere really how they matched up the data so that could be the case if I didn't overlook anything, but I'm just speculating at this point.
to be honest it could still be a hidden variable that we don't know about yet. Maybe some concept or quantity we haven't discovered yet.
Precise oscillations of quantum entangled particles was also theorized, but also disproven, as even delaying the detection of one of the entangled particles did not change the sister particle from displaying the proper spin. There is nothing left, there is no other mechanism left which could communicate the appropriate information. The only reasonable conclusion is, three dimensional distance is an illusion, and particles themselves exist on a higher plane of existence, at least partially, which was already predicted in other theories. This would allow them to exist detached from time, so the information could be communicated to it as it was able to communicate with it at one point in time. It's 'hidden variable' could simply be that it simply does not need to do things in chronological order.
If you really think about it however, anything which moves at the speed of light, cannot have a concept of time in the first place. Time would stop at that speed. So this time restricted order of operations does seem to be foreign idea to something which exists outside of it in the first place.
@@rich1051414
Donald Hoffman is on this in interesting ways
In order to understand the experiment you really have to understanding the bell inequality, if you understand you will be shocked.
This comment didn’t age well 😂
Wow, amazing! This must be one of the best educational institutions there is, to make progress with such phenomena👍
and what were the results of the 20%? were the 20% non measurable as in the tests failed? or both particles showed upwards or down wards spin that's comparable to one another when measured? or the measurement was simultaneous up and down spin? Curious what were the results on the 20%, thanks.
At 4:39, it says “At this point, the two electrons get entangled”. But how? Any explanation?
what is the name of soundtrack?
If the distance cannot be travelled by these communicating electrons within the boundaries of the speed of light, but the entanglement does take place in 80% of the experiments done, does this mean that these electrons communicate with each other with a speed that surpasses the speed of light?
+casaamaril it's instant.
Two electrons at two seemingly different places are in singlet state. If you make measurement of polarization or spin on one particle, second particle will instantly change its state to give you exactly opposite result (law of conservation of momentum), no matter how distant those particles are. By measurement is meant any form of physical interaction from which can be state of the particle derived. But you still can't use this phenomenon to send any form of information by speed higher than the speed of light. It's hypothesized the way spacetime is created and basic geometric spacetime structure is in very intimate correlation with this action at a distance. And that it's responsible for existence of spacetime.
+Matúš Frisík Thank you Matús for your response!
You're welcome. And entanglement doesn't take place in 80% of experiments. 80% means correlation between measurements of entangled states. All electrons measured are entangled in this experiment. Otherwise, experiment would be useless. Mathematically, probability derived by Bell's inequalities says that correlation should be equal or less than 75%. If electrons have some hidden variables that determine result of experiments. But experiment proved it's 80% which is in accordance with theory and it proved that there are not hidden variables and particles are truly in quantum entangled state.
+Matúš Frisík Mat. I disagree with your hypothesis. I think it possible to transmit and receive information faster then light speed. As particals are entangled, a matrix of said could be amassed at different site anywhere within the universe. By encoding one group with the other, discernible information could be sent by changing one or the other matrix structures. The other would respond instantaneously. Not unlike Morse Code at its' simplest. Efforts are being made to build a quantum computer. Build two, separate them and they would be able to communicate over any distance instantly without any physical interface whatever.
Could you please list the name of the song used in this video.
+Mark G I wanna know also...
+Mark G me too
+Mark G Me too!
Me too.
It's called "duh-duh-duh, duh-duh, dum-duh dum-duh.." (repeat to infinity)
Once particles become entangled, they act as if they are part of the same fundamental unit of spacetime (string) and necessarily have instant communication, since we cannot measure in smaller units.
What song is this? I recognize the quote from the Polio vaccine.
This is the best video I have ever seen
So the electron spin between the diamonds are somehow "referencing" each other without any previous setup work to "connect" them? But they're not entangled until almost the very end of the process?
It seems to me that the act or process of "entangling" the two distant electron spins anti-correlates their spins. And the entanglement process itself occurs at light speed or less so. How is that different from two physical particles having correlated momentums if they were created at the same time such as particle and antiparticle creation? If you measure one you know the momentum of the other even though it's far away because the momentums are correlated.
hey nerds, quick question.... what is the definition of information @ 00:21?
mioumitsou forces or any interaction in the universe is via force carrying particles which has a zero rest mass and travel at the speed of light.. also light is the force carrying particle of electromagnetism hence no information can travel faster than the speed of light
Information is any data which can be used to make any form of predictions or can be used for any form of analysis of a system as of currently we know any information can be sent only by use of some form of energy so no information can travel faster than light
Just to be sure, what was the correlation without entanglement (splitter)?
Thanks to the music qm is now even more scary
The photons were measured near one another? Could this matter? Maybe the photons need to be measured back far away instead of near the central point.
What about third sister ? İt reduce the inequality rate right?
00:30f
_According to Quantum Mechanics, a particel can be in two states at the same time._
Not just two but a whole continuum of them.
Actually, it's not multiple _states_ but one state which can be a superposition of multiple _eigenstates_ with respect to a certain physical quantity or observable while it might be just one eigenstate with respect to another one.
If an Electron in an atom is in an eigenstate with respect to its energy (meaning that you'll always get the same value of it when you measure it), it's clearly not in an eigenstate with respect to position, obviously.
What's the name of the soundtrack? :O
I hate to be the one asking ... but what song is this ? :)))
+WeNDoRx I want to know as well............................
+WeNDoRx For those looking for the soundtrack:
www.scixel.es/#soundtrack
+Enrique Sahagun Thank you verry much for the response :)
Enrique's link is dead, just goes to that site, nothing about the song :(
What is it?
Couldn’t the electrons have locally shared hidden variable information when they were measured close to each other?
Are the directions set/checked during the transfer? Could the direction not be set during the entanglement, rather than before it? Like a magnet, they just oppose each other?I'm really confused :)
I dont get it, I'm thinking the hidden variables can still be created the moment you entangle the two photons, why am I wrong?
Exactly what I thought.
Can anyone explain to me why should be only greater than 75%?
Maybe this video can help you understand the 75% ua-cam.com/video/z1twSZF4fLM/v-deo.html
so by this method we can suppose that parallel universe can exists where things can be 80% similar to us as we are entangled
name of song?
Please.. the song name? Followed a link to their site from a previous comment but it didn'r work :(
Much better than the other video. !! Good.
Some folks still believe in hidden variable(s), it's because we accustomed to daily experience so deeply.
the other does not change. the entanglement wraps itself around your focal point.
:'c
i'll need to review this a few times cause it's kinda hard for me to comprehend. But TYSM for making these videos free
-The electrons emit photons.
-The photons are entangled with the spin of electrons.
-The photons collide.
-At this point of time, the 'electrons' get entangled ! how ??
Pls reply... m confused !!
I'll gloss over some of the inconsistencies here. Especially with particles being in the same state at the same time, are you trying to equate superposition with that statement, because its definitively not that.
Very Interesting!!!
I’m curious to know more about it
Once we reveal the spin of the electron, can we change it?
Not sure about these electrons, but if you have one in a atom orbital you can excite it to a different level and by doing so change its spin.
can someone explain to me how this debunks materialism? All the results are made of "observable matter". If anything doesn't it pose more of a threat to determinism??
Well i suppose if there is a causal link here that is operating faster than the speed of light than how can space be real? If any two things in the physical universe are to affect one another than the fastest that interaction should be able to take place is the speed of light. in quantum mechanics this is not the case and locality seems to be violated, that is why Einstein called this "spooky action at a distance".
Personally my years of truth seeking have brought me to the reality of Idealism - reality is fundamentally mental, consciousness or being is what is real. Hence the soul exists
Because those particles that they travel just before they are measured they are waves of possibilities AKA have not yet become anything physical/solid, but once they are measured/bombarded with light/observed call it whatever you want to call it, they become solid/physical.... That's why Einstein didn't like the spooky action at distance, he said even if he don't look at the moon he can not accept to believe that the moon is not there just because he is not looking at it.... Welcome to Quantum Physics, the science that puts all religions to shame when it comes to weirdness.
what if, you do the opposite? first the entanglement, and then the two particles travel at the opposite ends and then measure it.
4:38 The electrons were never measured, regardless of entanglement. You measured the photons. You animation showed that the entanglement was between the photons, at this apparatus (a mirror?), and was measured in extreme close proximity. The original electrons being 1.3km away from each other appeared irrelevant.
trying to understand what this is about..... ? is this space travel ?
This is your connection outside of the matrix.
is this a homestuck reference
They wrote an article about this which was published in Dec-2018 UnScientific Amerkin.
All good but the entanglement means your two qubits will always yield the "same outcome" ... so if you observe a Green Apple on one of your entangled sides, you will observe a Green Apple on the other side as well ... not the opposite state. The entanglement ensures that when your qubits collapse due to your observation, quite randomly, they both show the exact same outcome!
Basically it like, conditional probability. Once Event E i.e first apple coming up Green happens it affects the probability of another one turning Red or Green.. so it is not that both end up being Green or Red Just probabilities change.. it becomes more likely ..
Seems as a sound experiment one which a serious amount of time have been taken with, I wouldn't want to take it yet as a sort of counter proof to a theoretical theory.
Windmills don't hover and fly by changing the information of their structure or is it?.
I think anyone would like to know how Einsteins mind puzzled its way to conjure a
theory, It may be to early but this could be profound in a latter direction as it always
happen in scientific community.
Very nice explanation
Why was Einstein wrong if the result was >75%, why not >85%?
geweldig, kan ik mn cursus astrofysica weer opniew gaan doen
Which particles are entangled?
Does this entanglement say anything about the size of the universe?
If entangled maybe they are not many. They are one…? You get it!
The 'particles' are electrons, trapped in nitrogen vacancies (see video at 03:28)
Had to watch the video four times to understand more or less the point. I am not a physics guy but generally interested. Am I right that Einstein is definitively falsified ? If QT is right why isn't 100% going through? Put differently : this is not a verification of Quantum Theory? It is quite possible that I missed something.
+bennie gek I am also interested in the question of why it's not 100%
+bennie gek Could be a certain margin of error with the experiment itself, are all sets of photons properly entangling when they are supposed to for example.
+bennie gek because relativity and quantum mechanics are not two theories that contradict each other. Einstein just didn't like the idea of something that happens at random.
+bennie gek This actually proves the things that Einstein showed in regards to quantum mechanics. However Einstein didn't like the implications of his own work and so he said there must be something else going on that we don't know about - the "hidden variables". He probably felt this was necessary because the speed of light is really a stand in for the speed of causality, and this "spooky action at a distance" breaks that limit. This experiment helps prove that the hidden variables don't exist and that Einstein's original predictions about "action at a distance" are correct.
no men, this actually proves Einstein was wrong.... Einstein thought that there is a some sort of a hidden force that predict what will be the variable ahead of time. Either way, whether Einstein proven wrong or wright does not take away the weirdness of how 2 particles communicate instantaneously at distances that our minds can not even grasp, and yet whatever happens on the macro level does not influence us not 1 bit in our every day life.
Why aren't the results 100% if all loopholes are closed en quantum mechanics are correct? The entanglement fails in 20% of cases?
Also confirm why we have Astral travels at long distances and we can be in two places in same time...
+eblanco78 No, it doesn't
why couldn't this have been done in the 1970s?
We didnt have the tech to construct quit in lattice, and probably Laser was not as strong to focus on single atom.
I was going to past a link to a relevant article, but the pasting function is disabled! (on FF)
WTF, UA-cam?!?
(Sorry, I'm not going to manually type the long URL! UA-cam can go f- itself!!)
Wow, copy-and-paste works fine in the replies, but not in the comments...
Here is the link: www.cnet.com/news/physicists-prove-einsteins-spooky-quantum-entanglement/
This video reminds me of an Amiga demo from the 90's
Sooo... it's black magic, then?
Unfortunately this explanation itself is not "loophole free"; as can be seen from the comments below, it is very poorly explained.
This explanation reminds me of lectures by an old physics professor I had at university who was so intelligent that he left out large chunks of very important information in his proofs, just writing "obviously this follows.." - he made the mistake of assuming all his students were as intelligent as him and would be offended by being "spoon-fed".
Conclusion: "The universe is conclusively weird"
Isn't that Weirdt?
I/ve actually simulated this, experiment, in SW, and figured out how to reproduce their results.
If U really want to know and ask me, nicely, I may be persuaded to tell U, how.
"They don't. They won't". I know, Marv.
crazy. super cool too.
They did not close all the loopholes they left like always the most obvious loop wide open
sorry maar ik geloof het nog niet helemaal, ik vindt het bijna net zo ongelofelijk dat een engel of god het doet best heel zwak bewijs
"aliens"
lol
not only can a particle be in two places at the same time. So can an entire galaxy. I have all the proof if anyone would like it.
This video is about 4 minutes too long.
Oh I understood it just fine. That is why it could have been presented much faster.
Red=Not(Green), easy.
All the rest is waste of time, based on vectorial notations (sqrt(2)).
Ye's. Now I actually think I understand what U are talking about,
but would U care to elaborate/explain, so the others do, too?
Travelers on Netflix brought me here
I would patent the sun if I could
+Tyler Cole you can't patent the sun.. ahaha...
I don't think you can entangle two separate electrons because you shined a laser at them. It would be like stating: because you shined a flash light at a splitting mirror which bounced the beams at two identical basket balls a mile apart they are now entangled. I think for something truly to become entangled you'd have to split an object (like an electron). At that moment the two halves are now entangled. if you move them apart and observe from the middle. as you turn to look at each half you will see they are rotating in opposite directions. If you look at them from the left or right you will see they rotate in the same direction. If you move them anywhere in the universe in any orientation, they will mimic each other's rotation (that is, if you have the ability to change the rotation of one of the halves in the first place). Sorry, I simply can't accept this experiment proves or disproves anything.
bad music choice for this video
BS